Next Gen 2014 (F32) M3 Performance Simulations/Predictions - She'll Be Fast!

[devo]

Originally Posted by shift@red

Car is sick! Love it.

I have a friend who has an GT3 Cup as his track car, and my god the thing is insane...and so are the lap times he puts down with it.

Devo - OT also, but have you seen the $1MM Porsche advent calendar?

No!???

[e46e92love]

Originally Posted by devo

^^^ This should add some of that soul you're looking for:

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2010...NEWS/101209992

Sorry Swamp, it's OT I know, but I had to do it. It's almost Xmas and a guy can have a gift list, right?

Yep.....that about does it.

Cheers,
e46e92

[kaykay]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

There is literally zero chance that they use an N55 in this car. It will be an S55 (or S56, if an N56 debuts in next couple years) with some very advanced turbo technology never seen before on any production car.

100%

I see BMW coming out with one hell of an engine for this car.

[M3_WC]

What is BMW going to do with their M3 racing programs, if the M3 goes to a FI 6-cylinder. Take ALMS for example, what are the regulations in GT2 pertaining to powerplants? Their isn't any manufacturers running FI in the GT2 class.

[double_j]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

I still don't really agree. In fact, I can't think of a single manufacture where pricing of their lineup and acceration specs are in sync. This is especially the case when you look at the different goals of different products accross the lineup. Certainly you don't think an M3 is slower to 60 than a 750Li? For that matter compare the base price of an X6 35i (never mind the 50i for a moment, which the M3 will still beat) with an E90 M3.

I'll qualify one more time and say the relationship applies within categories; comparisons with the x series or luxury models aren't relevant. 4 seconds is still 'super car' territory and will not be a target performance goal for the next M3 given what is acceptable in the expected price range and competitive set. And although not a defined goal, I do think that BMW will take the opportunity to charge more than planned if a sub 4 second benchmark is achieved.

Like I said, 0-60 and price are not necessarily explicitly causal but they are correlated (within categories).

A different thought is that the next m3 will get performance very similar to the e60 m5. It's like we're one performance generation removed from the big brother in the line up.

[bavarian19]

Originally Posted by mrad01

They are not going to use the N55 (or varient) in the next M3. The design of the N54 and N55 mills doesn't have the tuning and reliability creds they need for a e9x M3 V8 beater.

Pretty sure it will be a 8cyl TT putting out less than the nextgen M5 version.

It is pretty well known it will be a 6 cylinder.

My best guess is it will be around the 4.1-4.3 0-60 times. I highly doubt the BMW published value for it will break 4.0. Even though it would be lighter and up on power (and torque hopefully), I don't see it being in the 3's.


Who knows... maybe they will offer a tuned and dieted M3 like a true CSL should be.

[My535i]

If the new M5 is going to be used for any type of guidance I personally think M5 HAS TO have (way) more than 550HP...It needs to utterly DESTROY the CTS-V.

Originally Posted by swamp2

That's all pretty reasonable. Though based on the estimated torque figures for the F10 M5 I think 365 ft lb torque is way too low. Also, just as the new 1M is, the next M3 has to "mind its place in line", with 475 hp its power to weight would probably be way too close to the new 550 hp F10 M5. Then again that car might be more than 550.

[Erhan]

Slightly off topic, but I always wondered this about fuel economy. Since the main driving reason for BMW is to be green, I thought I'd ask this question here. Forgive my lack of knowledge.

A V8 engine is two I4 engines bolted together in V shape. Could it be possible to use only one of the I4 banks for let say cruising? If possible, I think that'll be 'green'. We'd have the full V8 for normal usage. And manually or automatically (which can even be programmed in to M drive), we can switch to single I4 mode for high way cruising...

[Pete_vB]

Originally Posted by shift@red

The thing is, the GT3 doesnt need anything more than what it is/has. It is THE winningest car in motorsport history from THE winningest manufacturer in motorsport history. Why mess with what works? Its not supposed to be a high tech motor. Its just supposed to be a reliable one that wins races and does so with ease over the v8 competition. Cars like the 911 turbo pack a lot of tech, and things im sure BMW wont have for quite a while in their cars.

Originally Posted by devo

^^^ Exactly! The Mezger engine has a long history of winning races and endurance reliability. Although there may be higher tech stuff, the GT3 with 114.4 hp per liter and the RS with 118.4 speaks volumes. Their current torque curves are very, very impressive as well.

There is no doubt that the Metzger motor is powerful, reliable, and one of the best motors ever built, and I do love mine. But everything gets old... The '07 GT3 cup motor in the back of my car is 480 lbs dressed. The street motors add emissions and a bunch of other stuff and weigh a lot more. Now compare that to a Carrera GT, for example- a street motor that weighs 8 lbs less than my race motor at 472 lbs, but has 184 more hp. And this is an older motor (2003) that was also designed for endurance racing and has a dry sump- I don't think anyone doubt its reliability.

The reason is pretty obvious when you take a GT3 motor apart- every time they added power they also added weight. That flat power curve? Bolt on variocam and a three stage intake. Bolt on emissions controls, water jackets for pistons, water passages and water pumps, etc, each with it's own separate castings and bolts. So the newest GT3 motor is also the heaviest. In contrast to Porsche's slow evolution, BMW has been pushing engine technology every generation of M3. Using clean-sheet design they were able to make the S65 V8 33 lbs lighter than the S54 it replaced while still gaining over 80 hp. They've been pushing the use of lighter materials, and advanced concepts like valvetronic. The result is an engines that are both more advanced and have higher power to weight ratios than their porsche counterparts; I know some porsche race engine designers and the freely admit to this.

Of course this is about to change, and the CGT reminds us of what Porsche can do when they put their mind to it. Porsche will drop a huge amount of weight from the tail of the car with a clean-sheet design when they go to the next gen GT3 motor while still gaining power. In the end that's why you mess with success...

My original point was not to sell BMW engineers short here- they are on the very cutting edge on engine design, and we've seen what they can do as well. When they don't blow motors up, that is (early S54s, etc)...

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by kdiz

I will love it if they manage this, but 0-60 in 3.7, i very much doubt this. They will never let the m3 be quicker than the m5 and m6, I can't see them making a car such as the m5 or m6 around 3.5 seconds 0-60.

Time will tell I guess.....

I agree 3.7 is unlikely that is the essence of why I am using ranges of values - inputs to the simulation and outputs from it. There is simply no way to make exact predictions. Heck the power output is not even precise yet. That being said up to 80-100mph or so the M3 will probably be pretty neck and neck with the new M5. As I posted earlier, keep in mind how incredibly conservative official BMW acceleration figures are, well over 1/2 second conservative. My numbers are best case US magazine predictions part of that is because they (with a custom taken from US drag racing) allow a 1 foot roll out. This make a 0.3-0.4 second difference compared to the European magazines. I think they will see 4.2-4.4 second times for their 0-100 km/h times.

Originally Posted by My535i

If the new M5 is going to be used for any type of guidance I personally think M5 HAS TO have (way) more than 550HP...It needs to utterly DESTROY the CTS-V.

BMW M has consistently bested other manufacturers efforts at the track with less hp (particularly AMG). I don't expect the M5 vs. CTS-V to be any different. Even if it has a bit more power than the CTS-V its overall chassis excellence will give it better track performance.

[dlbrooks18]

I think what's key to remember is that the next generation M will have enormous tuning potential (nothing like a turbocharged car from the factory), so with a simple software flash, 3.7 sec 0-60 times and 11 sec 116+mph traps will be easily attainable

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by aus

Everything on Roundel for the last few months has said the next M3 will have a turbo I6. It'd also been said BMW believes the ideal cylinder size to be 0.5L; thus is especially true for the M division, but who knows with Segler running the show now.

Audi has a 400 hp 2.5L turbo I-5 in their Quattro Coupe concept. I predict a 475 hp turbo I-7 in the M3!

[swamp2]

Some justification for the weight numbers in the OP.

Audi R8 GT vs. standard R8 weight savings:

This was a big thrust toward weight reduction for this variant, more so than a big power or torque bump. They achieved:

-Seats: 69 lb
-Lightweight carpet: 17 lb
-Thinner windshield glass: 20 lb
-CF hood , bumpers and side "blades": 29 lb
-Battery: 21 lb
-Intake and sound insulation: 11 lb
-Carbon ceramic brakes: 20 lb

This already totals almost 190 lb, well above the upper limit of the number I've estimated for the M3 reductions. Of course I'm pretty sure the next gen M3 is not going to get CC brakes, but either way the numbers I have posted are totally realistic.

[Erhan]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Some justification for the weight numbers in the OP.

Audi R8 GT vs. standard R8 weight savings:

This was a big thrust toward weight reduction for this variant, more so than a big power or torque bump. They achieved:

-Seats: 69 lb
-Lightweight carpet: 17 lb
-Thinner windshield glass: 20 lb
-CF hood , bumpers and side "blades": 29 lb
-Battery: 21 lb
-Intake and sound insulation: 11 lb
-Carbon ceramic brakes: 20 lb

This already totals almost 190 lb, well above the upper limit of the number I've estimated for the M3 reductions. Of course I'm pretty sure the next gen M3 is not going to get CC brakes, but either way the numbers I have posted are totally realistic.

I don't know the seats they used in Audi R8 GT, but I assume they're carbonfibre racing seats. And the big chunk of the savings are coming from the seats. BMW will NEVER put seats like that in a standard M3. Nor thinner windsield glass.

[Erhan]

In fact, I'm expecting 360 degree power seats from BMW

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by bavarian19

It is pretty well known it will be a 6 cylinder.

My best guess is it will be around the 4.1-4.3 0-60 times. I highly doubt the BMW published value for it will break 4.0. Even though it would be lighter and up on power (and torque hopefully), I don't see it being in the 3's.


Who knows... maybe they will offer a tuned and dieted M3 like a true CSL should be.

CSL would be nice. But they alwasys screw over US customers.

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

What is BMW going to do with their M3 racing programs, if the M3 goes to a FI 6-cylinder. Take ALMS for example, what are the regulations in GT2 pertaining to powerplants? Their isn't any manufacturers running FI in the GT2 class.

Anyone?

They can no longer make a limited model like the E46 GTR V8, as the rules do not allow it.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by shift@red

My issue with this is that the R8 GT is meant to be a lightweight model and there is certainly a difference in price. The M3 is still a luxury oriented car. So you can forget about nearly all of what is listed there IMO. Ceramic brakes, not a chance. Lighter carpet, dont see that happening. Dont see the seats or thinner glass being viable. Maybe a cf hood, but its weight savings are truly minimal.

I totally disagree. The M3 already has lightweight carpet. I'd be willing to be the next get has even less dense carpet (meaning lighter in the end). I'd also be willing to bet that the trunk and or hood to be CF. BMW bought a large facility some years ago with capability to product small production levels of CF components. The glass and battery are also "no brainers". Like I already said CC brakes are unlikely. It is all about the most weight they can shave off per dollar. CC brakes rated in lb/dollar is very low whereas carpet, glass, battery and CF panels (as long as done in a reasonable high production volume) are quite high lb/dollar. BMW is getting more and more serious about weight and much of this will be seen in the next M3.

[devo]

Originally Posted by Pete_vB

There is no doubt that the Metzger motor is powerful, reliable, and one of the best motors ever built, and I do love mine. But everything gets old... The '07 GT3 cup motor in the back of my car is 480 lbs dressed. The street motors add emissions and a bunch of other stuff and weigh a lot more. Now compare that to a Carrera GT, for example- a street motor that weighs 8 lbs less than my race motor at 472 lbs, but has 184 more hp. And this is an older motor (2003) that was also designed for endurance racing and has a dry sump- I don't think anyone doubt its reliability.

The reason is pretty obvious when you take a GT3 motor apart- every time they added power they also added weight. That flat power curve? Bolt on variocam and a three stage intake. Bolt on emissions controls, water jackets for pistons, water passages and water pumps, etc, each with it's own separate castings and bolts. So the newest GT3 motor is also the heaviest. In contrast to Porsche's slow evolution, BMW has been pushing engine technology every generation of M3. Using clean-sheet design they were able to make the S65 V8 33 lbs lighter than the S54 it replaced while still gaining over 80 hp. They've been pushing the use of lighter materials, and advanced concepts like valvetronic. The result is an engines that are both more advanced and have higher power to weight ratios than their porsche counterparts; I know some porsche race engine designers and the freely admit to this.

Of course this is about to change, and the CGT reminds us of what Porsche can do when they put their mind to it. Porsche will drop a huge amount of weight from the tail of the car with a clean-sheet design when they go to the next gen GT3 motor while still gaining power. In the end that's why you mess with success...

My original point was not to sell BMW engineers short here- they are on the very cutting edge on engine design, and we've seen what they can do as well. When they don't blow motors up, that is (early S54s, etc)...

The next gen. GT3/RS aka 991 GT3/RS will use a variant of the contemporary 9A1 engine. Although it will make more power and be pushed a few inches closer to center than its predecessor, it'll unlikely sustain a major weight loss if at all evidenced by the current 9A1. So, very likely 480-490 hp with a 20-25 lb reduction for engine weight; likely more-so total weight loss. Not that that's not bad, but you won't see major revolution just evolution as the Porsche people say. Hey, I could be wrong.

I agree though that BMW does make some of the best engines and does push the design envelope.

[duk]

We're not going to get a stripped down lightweight m3, at least not as mainstream models. Too many ppl want their luxo goodies and gadgets! We'll be lucky if we see really lightweight more dedicated comp model.

we'll be lucky if the next gen M3 is around the same weight as current gen.

[sparoz]

Originally Posted by kaykay

Sorry guys, so-called "BMW insiders" on a car forum are the last people I'd listen to when it comes to what engine will be in the next-generation M3.

NOBODY and I repeat, nobody knows what engine will be in this car. To date, all of this engine talk is pure speculation to keep the forum heads occupied.

I'm pretty sure it won't be a variant of the N55, there will most likely be a new engine in the M3.

Evidence, speculation, insider info, all bullshit until we here the official news from BMW AG themselves.

Only if Scott is really an "insider". Really, our "insider" is really a representative from BMW, marketing to the forums. His information is not always firm when released on the forum but it gives us a snap shot on what BMW's direction is.

Nothing is firm until the final release, but you can read into a bit more. From your argument, then your following post about what you speculate is also bullshit.

When we are looking something pre-release, really we are doing so for our entertainment, but I feel that putting what's being said, plus business case scenarios like you did, will give us a very good picture.

I know we had hopes for M to come up with a new engine, they have already deviate from their previous with regards to engine in the 1M. The M5, a very iconic car from the line up is recycling the engine from the X5M/6M. I believe the next M cars - it will have a unique piece with their engine, it will not be a completely new engine from the ground up.

I am sure there will be innovations with the M3 engine than the 1M, but I do feel it will be an evolution of the N55, while still addressing the competitions. BMW has indicated that they are moving towards more weight savings than power, so may be it would be more accurate to look at the power/weight ratio than just horse power alone.

[3s-a-charm]

160 lb. driver??? I've got to lose some weight... sigh.